From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2019 14:24:56 +0000
Subject: Re: [PATCH] efifb: BGRT: Add check for new BGRT status field rotation bits
Message-Id: <3065d32f-add7-4e48-164b-c248cc116cea@redhat.com>
List-Id: <linux-fbdev.vger.kernel.org>
References: <20190529154635.2659-1-hdegoede@redhat.com>
 <CAKv+Gu8bLcDROFNFfqHaN1Z+EK5bnXMNDSJbBK-pCmq5XP_kBw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKv+Gu8w2Vj-AS-cfaB8cms+ZJ7qppS-Du_334_xm51rz0CYsA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAKv+Gu8w2Vj-AS-cfaB8cms+ZJ7qppS-Du_334_xm51rz0CYsA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>
Cc: linux-efi <linux-efi@vger.kernel.org>, "open list:EFIFB FRAMEBUFFER DRIVER" <linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org>, Peter Jones <pjones@redhat.com>, dri-devel <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@samsung.com>

Hi,

On 11-06-19 16:04, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Jun 2019 at 17:12, Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 29 May 2019 at 17:46, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Starting with ACPI 6.2 bits 1 and 2 of the BGRT status field are no longer
>>> reserved. These bits are now used to indicate if the image needs to be
>>> rotated before being displayed.
>>>
>>> The efifb code does not support rotating the image before copying it to
>>> the screen.
>>>
>>> This commit adds a check for these new bits and if they are set leaves the
>>> fb contents as is instead of trying to use the un-rotated BGRT image.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
>>
>> Acked-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>
>>
> 
> BTW should we make sure that this patch and the efi-bgrt patch get
> merged at the same time?

The 2 patches are related but merging them at the same time is not
necessary.

> I guess the net result is just that we get
> rid of some error in the log, but a rotated BMP will be ignored
> otherwise.

Right, worse case (if the bmp fits pre-rotation) it will be displayed
rotated. Note on the one machine I'm aware of which uses these bits
the bmp does not fit pre-rotation, so we end up triggering:

error:
         memunmap(bgrt_image);
         pr_warn("efifb: Ignoring BGRT: unexpected or invalid BMP data\n");
}

Which this patch replaces with hitting:

         if (bgrt_tab.status & 0x06) {
                 pr_info("efifb: BGRT rotation bits set, not showing boot graphics\n");
                 return;
         }

Instead. So at least on the one machine I know of this is 99% cosmetic.

> Or is it relevant for userland in some other way?

No.

Regards,

Hans